Automated Analysis of Impact of Scheduling on Performance of Self-stabilizing Protocols
In a concurrent computing system, a scheduler determines at each time which computing task should execute next. Thus, a scheduler has tremendous impact on the performance of the tasks that it orchestrates. Analyzing the impact of scheduling in a distributed setting is a challenging task, as it is concerned with subtle dimensions such as geographical distance of processes and the achievable level of parallelism. In this paper, we propose an automated method based on probabilistic verification for analyzing fault recovery time in distributed self-stabilizing protocols. We exhibit the usefulness of our approach through a large set of experiments that demonstrate the impact of different types of scheduling policies on recovery time of different classes of stabilizing protocols, and the practical efficiency of classical self-stabilizing scheduler transformers.
KeywordsSchedule Policy Randomization Parameter Arbitrary Graph Vertex Coloring Schedule Criterion
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Aflaki, S., Faghih, F., Bonakdarpour, B.: Synthesizing self-stabilizing protocols under average recovery time constraints. In: Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS) (to appear, 2015)Google Scholar
- 2.Arora, A., Gouda, M.G., Herman, T.: Composite routing protocols. In: Proceedings of the Second IEEE Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing (SPDP), pp. 70–78 (1990)Google Scholar
- 3.Beauquier, J., Johnen, C.: Analyze of probabilistic algorithms under indeterministic scheduler. In: IEEE International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing with Applications (ISPA), pp. 553–558 (2008)Google Scholar
- 4.Devismes, S., Tixeuil, S., Yamashita, M.: Weak vs. self vs. probabilistic stabilization. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), pp. 681–688 (2008)Google Scholar
- 6.Dubois, S., Tixeuil, S.: A taxonomy of daemons in self-stabilization. CoRR, abs/1110.0334 (2011)Google Scholar
- 8.Fallahi, N., Bonakdarpour, B., Tixeuil, S.: Rigorous performance evaluation of self-stabilization using probabilistic model checking. In: Proceedings of the 32nd IEEE International Conference on Reliable Distributed Systems (SRDS), pp. 153–162 (2013)Google Scholar
- 10.Gradinariu, M., Tixeuil, S.: Self-stabilizing vertex coloring of arbitrary graphs. In: Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems (OPODIS), pp. 55–70 (2000)Google Scholar
- 11.Gradinariu, M., Tixeuil, S.: Conflict managers for self-stabilization without fairness assumption. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), pp. 46–46 (2007)Google Scholar
- 15.Simaitis, A.: Automatic Verification of Competitive Stochastic Systems. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford (2014)Google Scholar